Jump to content

Chevron Skyscraper Proposal At 1600 Louisiana St.


ricco67

Recommended Posts

To clarify your clarification ;-)   

 

The upstream portion of the former ConocoPhillips is actually still named "ConocoPhillips", not "Conoco."

 

So we now have:

 

ConocoPhillips (an independent e&p company)

Phillips 66 (a refining, marketing & pipeline company)

Chevron (an integerated super major)

Chevron Phillips (a chemical company)

Correct (and your space between Chevron Phillips is correct as well).  Now we can get back to name dropping about how some executive at Chevron allegedly told X that this was a for sure deal in downtown.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How certain is this info?

 

How certain? I'll tell you how certain. I was just playing golf this morning with John S. Watson, whom you may know as the CEO of Chevron, over at the Gus Wortham, and he was laughing about all the doubting on this forum, where he is a longtime lurker. Says not only is this a done deal, but the building is actually already being constructed as we speak in a top-secret location in the Arctic, and will be flown into Houston by helicopter already finished next May as a big surprise and thank you to Houston for being such a great city. And hanging from the building will be a giant banner that says "Houston, the Eagle Has Landed - New Chevron Corporate HQ!"

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT - he added one caveat. He said he doesn't like to hear that some of us have been doubting this. We must drive the doubters from our midst. Chevron doesn't want to put its new building in a city of doubters. Chevron building will only come to the city that is most sincere. One false word and it could fly back and land in San Ramon.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

H-Town Man your story of the Chevron CEO telling you of the construction in a secret location in the Arctic, then flying the building in to Houston is totally believable. However, I gotta call BS on the playing golf this morning part. There's no way you could have made it to the golf course........ with all the traffic and all.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

H-Town Man your story of the Chevron CEO telling you of the construction in a secret location in the Arctic, then flying the building in to Houston is totally believable. However, I gotta call BS on the playing golf this morning part. There's no way you could have made it to the golf course........ with all the traffic and all.

 

Congrats on your first post and welcome to the forum. John S. Watson and I both live in Eastwood so it was only a walk to the golf course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody else think the first and only rendering we've seen is cheesy at best? Somebody said they saw more updated, realistic renderings! Please elaborate!!!! :)

 

Chevron building gonna go away if you keep complaining about the renderings. Only complete faith in the unseen will bring Chevron building.

 

its-the-great-pumpkin_thumb%25255B1%2525

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

H-Town Man your story of the Chevron CEO telling you of the construction in a secret location in the Arctic, then flying the building in to Houston is totally believable. However, I gotta call BS on the playing golf this morning part. There's no way you could have made it to the golf course........ with all the traffic and all.

 

I find this, if not sarcastic, then totally unreasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find this, if not sarcastic, then totally unreasonable.

 

I have been accused of being unreasonable a time or two in my lifetime. However, my comment in post #447 was an attempt at subtle humor, with the use of both conspicuous and inconspicuous sarcasm. The conspicuous sarcasm is obvious since H-Town Man's comments were comically absurd. The reference to Houston's reputed traffic would be the part that was inconspicuous since my comment indicated I didn't have a problem with the absurd assertion but chose instead to challenge his ability to get to the golf course due to traffic, on a morning that Houston was also inundated by heavy rainfall and strong winds.

I find this, if not sarcastic, then totally unreasonable.

 

I have been accused of being unreasonable a time or two in my lifetime. However, my comment in post #447 was an attempt at subtle humor, with the use of both conspicuous and inconspicuous sarcasm. The conspicuous sarcasm is obvious since H-Town Man's comments were comically absurd. The reference to Houston's reputed traffic would be the part that was inconspicuous since my comment indicated I didn't have a problem with the absurd assertion but chose instead to challenge his ability to get to the golf course due to traffic, on a morning that Houston was also inundated by heavy rainfall and strong winds.

oops

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been accused of being unreasonable a time or two in my lifetime. However, my comment in post #447 was an attempt at subtle humor, with the use of both conspicuous and inconspicuous sarcasm. The conspicuous sarcasm is obvious since H-Town Man's comments were comically absurd. The reference to Houston's reputed traffic would be the part that was inconspicuous since my comment indicated I didn't have a problem with the absurd assertion but chose instead to challenge his ability to get to the golf course due to traffic, on a morning that Houston was also inundated by heavy rainfall and strong winds.

 

I have been accused of being unreasonable a time or two in my lifetime. However, my comment in post #447 was an attempt at subtle humor, with the use of both conspicuous and inconspicuous sarcasm. The conspicuous sarcasm is obvious since H-Town Man's comments were comically absurd. The reference to Houston's reputed traffic would be the part that was inconspicuous since my comment indicated I didn't have a problem with the absurd assertion but chose instead to challenge his ability to get to the golf course due to traffic, on a morning that Houston was also inundated by heavy rainfall and strong winds.

oops

 

No worries. Your comment was understandable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The renderings that I have seen look really good, unfortunately it is very unlikely that you will get to see them before chevron wants which could easily be mid 2014......

 

Can you give us any sort of detail? Is it just a vertical tube with little detail to the curtain wall?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not an architect so let me try to describe this thing....

 

The tower has to vertical setbacks on two sides of the building.  All four faces of the building have a slight curve to them (there are no straight sections).

 

The coolest feature IMO is that the tower is smaller at the bottom.  The lower few levels (i think its 1-3) are setback from the upper floors by 10-15 feet.  There is a gentle slope up which will give a very cool view from the ground.  Seeing 49 floors cantilevered above your head should be pretty cool.

 

The podium portion of the tower will be crazy cool.  It seems like this section is still in flux but everything that I have seen is awesome.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...